While there is no denying the Marlins are a joke of a franchise, Ozzie Guillen may have completely ruined that team. They just never recovered from the Castro incident. He could not take the levels of talent they had and get them to function as a working unit.

It is amazing the fall out that those events had.

I think just signing Redmond would improve them immensely in 2013. But Loria is such a snake and has Selig as an enabler that he couldn't leave it alone.

Well, one team just traded for him. It'd be kind of hard to make the argument no one would trade for that contract under those conditions, I would think.

The Marlins did send $4 million in cash considerations.

__________________"Hope...may be indulged in by those who have abundant resources...but its nature is to be extravagant, and those who go so far as to stake their all upon the venture see it in its true colors only when they are ruined."-- Thucydides

When is the last time a trade got voided by the commish? In all seriousness, people pay hundreds of millions of dollars to own these teams. They should have the right to do with them what they will. If the league has a problem beyond the traded players (such as Florida taking advantage of taxpayer dollars for the stadium) then they can move forward with trying to remove the owner/force to sell.

Owners answer to the fans. If the fans do not like a move, they will not show up. But its a real pandora's box to start veto'ing trades because one side won. Such a bad idea.

The ONLY time a trade should be veto'd is if 2 owners were colluding/conspiring together.

When is the last time a trade got voided by the commish? In all seriousness, people pay hundreds of millions of dollars to own these teams. They should have the right to do with them what they will. If the league has a problem beyond the traded players (such as Florida taking advantage of taxpayer dollars for the stadium) then they can move forward with trying to remove the owner/force to sell.

Owners answer to the fans. If the fans do not like a move, they will not show up. But its a real pandora's box to start veto'ing trades because one side won. Such a bad idea.

The ONLY time a trade should be veto'd is if 2 owners were colluding/conspiring together.

I don't think it's a question about who won the trade. Honestly, Miami may have won the trade in the long run. They received some good young players.

My problem with the trade is that Miami just sent $160 million dollars of debt, based on my quick math, to the Blue Jays. This was the same problem I had with the Red Sox/Dodgers trade last year when Boston sent something like $250 million of debt to the Dodgers.

There are a lot of consequences to transactions as big as this. I had more of a problem with the Dodgers trade because Selig helped bail out McCourt last year, but the principle is the same.

When is the last time a trade got voided by the commish? In all seriousness, people pay hundreds of millions of dollars to own these teams. They should have the right to do with them what they will. If the league has a problem beyond the traded players (such as Florida taking advantage of taxpayer dollars for the stadium) then they can move forward with trying to remove the owner/force to sell.

Owners answer to the fans. If the fans do not like a move, they will not show up. But its a real pandora's box to start veto'ing trades because one side won. Such a bad idea.

The ONLY time a trade should be veto'd is if 2 owners were colluding/conspiring together.

The problem is that Loria brought in nearly $200m worth of players to justify the taxpayer money funding the stadium, under the pretense that the Marlins weren't playing the small market game anymore, and were going to spend money to make the team a perennial contender. Then, as soon as that money came in, he sold off the players so he didn't have to pay them. He screwed the people out of nearly $500m, and when (not if, but when) he sells the team, he's going to make off with even more free money. Then he's going to take that money and (most likely) buy the Mets with it, just like he took the Expos money and bought the Marlins with it. He's already screwed millions of people, and Selig is letting it happen. AGAIN. And he's probably going to let it happen with the Mets, too.

When is the last time a trade got voided by the commish? In all seriousness, people pay hundreds of millions of dollars to own these teams. They should have the right to do with them what they will. If the league has a problem beyond the traded players (such as Florida taking advantage of taxpayer dollars for the stadium) then they can move forward with trying to remove the owner/force to sell.

Owners answer to the fans. If the fans do not like a move, they will not show up. But its a real pandora's box to start veto'ing trades because one side won. Such a bad idea.

The ONLY time a trade should be veto'd is if 2 owners were colluding/conspiring together.

It wasn't a trade, but the commissioner nixed the White Sox adding Minnie Minoso to the roster in 1990.

When is the last time a trade got voided by the commish? In all seriousness, people pay hundreds of millions of dollars to own these teams. They should have the right to do with them what they will. If the league has a problem beyond the traded players (such as Florida taking advantage of taxpayer dollars for the stadium) then they can move forward with trying to remove the owner/force to sell.

Owners answer to the fans. If the fans do not like a move, they will not show up. But its a real pandora's box to start veto'ing trades because one side won. Such a bad idea.

The ONLY time a trade should be veto'd is if 2 owners were colluding/conspiring together.

My problem is the amount of money each team gets from network deals his payroll will probably be well below that.

__________________Joe Flacco Super Bowl 47 Champion and MVPJoe Flacco First Rookie QB to win 2 games in his first playoff.

My problem is the amount of money each team gets from network deals his payroll will probably be well below that.

I don't disagree with what everyone is saying, but the mlb does not have a salary cap or floor. That said, Miami, if it does not increase payroll, will not be able to receive revenue sharing. In the next CBA maybe they increase this more, but nothing they did was "against the rules".

When is the last time a trade got voided by the commish? In all seriousness, people pay hundreds of millions of dollars to own these teams. They should have the right to do with them what they will. If the league has a problem beyond the traded players (such as Florida taking advantage of taxpayer dollars for the stadium) then they can move forward with trying to remove the owner/force to sell.

Owners answer to the fans. If the fans do not like a move, they will not show up. But its a real pandora's box to start veto'ing trades because one side won. Such a bad idea.

The ONLY time a trade should be veto'd is if 2 owners were colluding/conspiring together.

They ain't showing up already. Will they break their Pro Player Stadium records too?

I don't disagree with what everyone is saying, but the mlb does not have a salary cap or floor. That said, Miami, if it does not increase payroll, will not be able to receive revenue sharing. In the next CBA maybe they increase this more, but nothing they did was "against the rules".

I'm kinda in agreement with the thinking here. God forbid I ever get selected to fill Bud's shoes. I would wield my authority like a bludgeon (and get summarily fired gloriously).